Sex and the Off-Label Use of Our Bodies

Design-of-everyday-things
What are our bodies meant for?

One of the most common condemnations of non-standard sex — from homosexuality to masturbation — is “that’s not what those body parts were meant for.” Genitals and sexual desire were supposedly designed for reproduction, and reproduction alone: by God (as the argument most commonly goes), or by evolution (as the argument occasionally gets made). To use these parts/ desires for any other purpose is dangerous at best and sinful at worst.

Okay. Let’s set aside for a moment the question of whether there even is a God, much less one who purposely designed the human body to fulfill his divine plan. The most common counter to this accusation is that it doesn’t get applied consistently. Not even by people who do believe in a God who created our bodies. As Dan Savage once pointed out: Our noses weren’t “designed” for us to rest our glasses on — and nobody gets their knickers in a twist over that. Off-label uses of our bodies are ridiculously common. I could come up with them all day. Our feet weren’t “meant” for us to operate the pedals of a car. Our mouths weren’t “meant” for us to play the harmonica. Our heads weren’t “meant” for us to display giant novelty foam-rubber cheese wedges and other oversized signals of allegiance to sports teams. Our hands weren’t “meant” for us to type on computer keyboards. (Boy howdy, were they ever not. My recent tendinitis flare-up is evidence enough of that.) And that doesn’t stop anyone from doing these things.

So why should sex be an exception? No, our mouths and assholes weren’t “designed” for sex, by God or by evolution. So what? We use our bodies in lots of ways and for lots of purposes that they weren’t “designed” for… and nobody considers that immoral. Computers and harmonicas and giant novelty cheese wedges are seen as acceptable and even positively neat. Why is anal sex somehow a perversion of the natural order?

A good argument. And one I frequently make myself.

But today, I’m going to take it a step further.

Off-label uses of body parts and biological functions aren’t just acceptable and morally neutral. They are some of the most beautiful, honorable, and deeply treasured parts of the human experience.

*

Thus begins my new piece on the Blowfish Blog, Sex and the Off-Label Use of Our Bodies. To read more — and to find out why I think off-label uses of our bodies isn’t just morally neutral but a positive and valuable good thing, read the rest of the piece. (And if you’re inspired to comment here, please consider cross-posting your comment to the Blowfish Blog — they like comments there, too.) Enjoy!

Sex and the Off-Label Use of Our Bodies
{advertisement}

Atheist Meme of the Day: Reasonable Plausibility vs. 100% Certainty

Scarlet letter
Today’s Atheist Meme of the Day, from my Facebook page. Pass this on; or don’t; or edit it as you see fit; or make up your own. Enjoy!

I can’t be 100% certain that the earth goes around the sun. But it almost certainly does, and unless I see good evidence to the contrary, I’m assuming that it’s true. And as an atheist, I can’t be 100% certain that there is no God — but the God hypothesis isn’t plausible, and unless I see better evidence, I’m assuming God doesn’t exist. Pass it on: if we say it enough times to enough people, it may get across.

Atheist Meme of the Day: Reasonable Plausibility vs. 100% Certainty

Atheist Meme of the Day: Untestable Beliefs Can Cause Real Harm

Scarlet letter
Today’s Atheist Meme of the Day, from my Facebook page. Pass this on; or don’t; or edit it as you see fit; or make up your own. Enjoy!

Atheists care what other people believe because we see harm done by those beliefs. We see the ways that the untestable belief in invisible beings, inaudible voices, undetectable forces, and events that happen after we die interferes with people’s reality check, and their ability to see the effects of their actions in the real world. Pass it on: if we say it enough times to enough people, it may get across.

Atheist Meme of the Day: Untestable Beliefs Can Cause Real Harm

Atheists in Foxholes

This piece was originally published on AlterNet.

No atheists in foxholes
“Sure, you deny God now. But when you’re looking death in the face — when you’re sick or in an accident or staring down the barrel of a gun — you’ll change your mind. You’ll beg for God then. There are no atheists in foxholes.”

This is one of the most common accusations that gets leveled against atheists. The idea seems to be that our atheism isn’t sincere. It’s naive at best, shallow at worst. We haven’t really thought through what atheism means; it’s somehow never occurred to us that atheism — and its philosophical companion, naturalism — means that death is forever. As soon as the harsh reality of what atheism means gets shoved in our faces, we’ll drop it like a hot potato.

Now, the most common atheist response to this accusation is to point out that it’s simply and flatly not true. And it’s one of the arguments I’m going to make myself, right now, here in this piece. This accusation is simply and flatly not true.

If you go to an atheist blog or forum, and you make this accusation, you’ll be inundated with stories of atheists who have faced death: their own, and that of people they love. You’ll hear stories of people who have been mugged, people who have been in terrible accidents, people who have faced life-threatening illnesses. You’ll hear stories of people who have suffered the illness and death of dearly beloved friends and family members. I’m one of those people.

And we didn’t stop being atheists.

Atheists in foxholes
This is even true of people who face death professionally, on a regular basis. Contrary to the common canard, there are, in fact, atheists in foxholes. There are atheist soldiers. Atheist police officers. Atheist firefighters. There are even entire organizations of them. (For a while, there was actually a group of military atheists with the waggish name, “Atheists In Foxholes.”)

Atheist responses to death and imminent death vary, of course, what with us being human and all. Some of us feel a desire to return to religion, a wish that we could believe in God and the afterlife and take comfort from that belief. Others of us are even more confirmed in our atheism than before: finding little comfort in the idea that death and tragedy were created deliberately by the hand of God, and finding great comfort in our humanist philosophies of life and death. But deathbed/ foxhole conversions to religion are really pretty rare. (If you’ve heard stories about them… know that many of these stories are made up by religious believers to bolster their case.)

When you think about it, the whole argument is completely absurd. Do people really think that, out of the millions of atheists around the country and around the world, none of us have ever been deathly ill, or suffered the loss of someone we loved? Does that even make sense?

But let’s move on. Let’s pretend, for the sake of argument, that this accusation is true. Let’s suppose that every single atheist who’s ever faced death has converted to religion.

How would that be an argument for religion being true?

Mistakes_were_made
If anything, it’s the opposite. It’s been clearly demonstrated that when we’re strongly motivated to believe something, we’re much more likely to believe it: we amplify the importance of evidence that seems to support this belief, filter out evidence that contradicts it, etc. When we really, really want to believe something, that’s when we have to be extra-cautious about concluding that it’s true… since the chances that we’re just trying to talk ourselves into it have shot through the roof. The human mind’s capacity to persuade itself of things it wants to believe is damn near limitless.

And the desire to believe in immortality is the mother of all wishful thinking. Especially when we’re immediately confronted by death.

So if atheists only converted to religion when they were on their deathbed… that wouldn’t be an argument for religion being a true and accurate perception of something in the real world. That’d actually be a strong argument for religion just being something people made up to make themselves feel better.

Okay. Those are the most common, most obvious defenses against the “atheists in foxholes” accusation. But I want to add something more — something that often gets left out of the conversation about foxholes and deathbed conversions.

I want to point out what an ugly argument this is.

What would you think if someone made this argument to a person of a different faith? “Sure, you believe in Judaism now — but when your plane is going down, you’ll turn to your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ”? Would you think that was an appropriate thing to say?

Or would you think it was religious bigotry, pure and simple? Regardless of what you personally believe about Jesus Christ and his ability to comfort people during plane crashes… would you renounce this argument as insensitive and tone-deaf at best, callous and inhumane at worst?

So how it is any different to make this argument to atheists?

Simpsons_nelson_ha_ha
And the “You’ll change your tune when you’re looking death in the face” trope has a Schadenfreude quality to it that is truly ugly. It takes a sadistic, “I told you so” glee in the potential suffering of others. There’s an almost hopeful quality to it that’s deeply unsettling. “Someday, you’ll be sick and dying with a terrible illness, or you’ll be in a terrifying accident, or the person you love most in the world will be gone from your life forever… and then I’ll be proven right! Then you’ll know the glory and majesty of the Lord! In your face!”

People will shamelessly and unhesitatingly say things about atheists that they would cringe from saying about people of different religions. Many believers — even progressive, ecumenical, “all religions have some truth and are all worshiping God in their own way” believers — will happily say that atheists are immoral, that atheists have no meaning or joy in our lives, that atheists are just being trendy or rebellious, that atheists have no right to express our views in the public forum. And even the most zealous hard-core believers will usually approach diverse religious beliefs with more understanding and tolerance than they show to atheism. Atheism seems to unsettle many believers, to a degree that different religious beliefs generally don’t… and those believers seem perfectly willing to take out that unsettled feeling on atheists.

And the “no atheists in foxholes” trope is a classic example of this. It’s not just a lie. It’s not even just an ignorant, absurd, colossally stupid lie. It’s a bigoted lie. It’s a lie that denies our most basic humanity: the fact that atheists love life, that we’re deeply attached to the people we love, and that we experience fear and grief in the face of death. It’s a lie that tries to depict us, not just as callow and naive, but as something less than human.

Please know that it’s a lie.

And please don’t tell it.

Atheists in Foxholes

Atheist Meme of the Day: The God of the Gaps Redux

Scarlet letter
Today’s Atheist Meme of the Day, from my Facebook page. Pass this on; or don’t; or edit it as you see fit; or make up your own. Enjoy!

“Religion explains what science can’t” is a terrible argument for religion. In human history, gaps in our understanding of the world have been filled by natural explanations thousands of times. They’ve been filled by supernatural explanations exactly never. Why would we assume that any current gaps in our knowledge are best filled by religion? Pass it on: if we say it enough times to enough people, it may get across.

Atheist Meme of the Day: The God of the Gaps Redux

Greta's "Atheism and Sexuality" Talk at Purdue: Video!

Purdue non theist society
I’m back, baby! Exhausted from the speaking tour… but also exhilarated. (The pic is me with the secretary, treasurer, and president of the Society of Non-Theists at Purdue University. As Jen McCreight — of BlagHag fame, and the abovementioned president and co-founder of the Society of Non-Theists at Purdue — points out in her write-up of the talk: Who says there aren’t any female atheists?)

I’ll post a more complete write-up of the event as soon as I’ve had time to recover. But in the meantime, Jen has posted a video of the Purdue talk. (Give it a minute or two to load.) Including the Q&A, which was one of the best and most fun parts. I’ve embedded it below the jump, since for some reason putting videos below the jump screws up my archives. If you want to see it full size, you can do that on Vimeo. (Again, give it a minute or two to load.) For those of you who wished you could come… seeing it on video is the next best thing!

Enormous thanks to Jen… and to the Purdue Queer Student Union, who co-sponsored the Purdue event… and to Joe Hughto of the Secular Alliance of Indiana University… and to Lyz Liddell of the Secular Student Alliance… and to everyone in all these organizations who helped make this trip run so smoothly. I’m totally hooked now. I want to do this all the time. If you want me to come speak about atheism and sexuality — or an assortment of other atheism- related topics — I’m yours, for the cost of a plane ticket and a hotel room. (Which the SSA will help you out with, if you’re part of their organization.) Wa-hoo!

Continue reading “Greta's "Atheism and Sexuality" Talk at Purdue: Video!”

Greta's "Atheism and Sexuality" Talk at Purdue: Video!

Atheist Meme of the Day: The Possibility of Being Mistaken

Scarlet letter
Today’s Atheist Meme of the Day, from my Facebook page. Pass this on; or don’t; or edit it as you see fit; or make up your own. Enjoy!

If you accuse an atheist of not being open to possibility, first ask yourself this: Are you open to the possibility that you might be mistaken? Is there any evidence that would convince you that there is no God and no supernatural, and that the natural world is all there is? Pass it on: if we say it enough times to enough people, it may get across.

Atheist Meme of the Day: The Possibility of Being Mistaken

Atheist Meme of the Day: Feeling is Not Knowledge

Scarlet letter
Today’s Atheist Meme of the Day, from my Facebook page. Pass this on; or don’t; or edit it as you see fit; or make up your own. Enjoy!

“I feel it in my heart” is not a good argument for God or religion. Human intuition is important and useful, but it’s very far from infallible: it often leads us to see intention and pattern even when there isn’t any, and it’s heavily biased in favor of what we already believe or what we want to believe. Pass it on: if… we say it enough times to enough people, it may get across.

Atheist Meme of the Day: Feeling is Not Knowledge

Atheist Meme of the Day: Unimpressed by Modern Theology

Scarlet letter
Today’s Atheist Meme of the Day, from my Facebook page. Pass this on; or don’t; or edit it as you see fit; or make up your own. Enjoy!

“You haven’t read modern theologian (X), therefore your critique of religion isn’t valid” is a terrible argument against atheism. Many atheists have read modern theology — and we’re not impressed. How much do we have to read before we can conclude that it makes no sense? Pass it on: if we say it enough times to enough… people, it may get across.

Atheist Meme of the Day: Unimpressed by Modern Theology

Brief Blog Break/ Shameless Self-Promotion Opportunity

As y’all know, I’m leaving town tomorrow to give my talk on atheism and sexuality at Indiana University and Purdue. Between the travel and the recent nasty tendinitis flare-up in my right arm (getting better, but I still have to limit my computer time), I won’t be blogging much for the next few days, if at all. I’ll try to keep up the Atheist Memes of the Day, but I don’t know what my free time or Internet connectivity is going to be while I’m gone, so I’m making no promises.

So while I’m away, let’s make this a Shameless Self-Promotion Thread! If you’re a blogger, I’m inviting you to post a link to your blog in this post’s comments. You can link to a specific post or two that you’re extra-fond of, or just let us know about your blog generally.

If you’re not a blogger, feel free to post a link to somebody else’s blog that you like — again, either a specific post you like, or the blog as a whole.

No commercial content, advertising, sales, marketing, etc. However, if you’re an artist or activist or something, and you don’t have a blog but you have a Website, please feel free to link to that instead. Have fun, and I’ll see you when I get back!

Brief Blog Break/ Shameless Self-Promotion Opportunity